Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-01-26

a CORRESPONDENT, whose cOmmunlca-
ton appears in another column, points out
very clearly that lottery advertising in
any form is no violation of our laws as
they stand. But he recognizes the need
for more effective statutory regulations.
We cannot conceive now that the atten-
ton of Legislators is called to the
subject, that they will hesitate to
construct the needed laws. Mere
statutory declaration against the vice
will effect little. AS our correspond
ent we'll suggests, there must be imposed
upon some one the duty of pursuing
offenders. We have sufficient confidence
in the innate sense of justice of newspaper
proprietors in California, to believe that
they will cease furnishing cause for COM
plant when once the making power of
the State declares that the evil shall cease.
Present offending is due to the doubt that
invests the question of "What is lottery
advertising?' All that is needed is to
clearly and explicitly define it, and then
require some official to attend to the en-
forcement of the law. Our correspondents
novel view of the economic side of the
question has force. But that there is a
drain of S150,00O by this vicious means
from the pockets of the people, cuts a
small figure in the great question whether
this State is prepared to indorse that
which the Federal laws prohibit and
against which the United States mails are
rigidly closed Here is scheme which
one of the most important Departments of
the Federal Government monthly black
lists as fraud, and participation in which
it pronounces to be crime; scheme our
Constitution and laws brand as criminal;
and yet the officials of the State and her
municipalities coolly countenance it by their
inactivity. We again call the attention of
the legislative Committees on Public Nor
ais to the field for action that opens to
them in this matter. The legislator who
shall rise equal TO the occasion and intro
duce and urge the necessary bills, will
deserve well of the people, though doing
nothing more than his sworn duty.
THE retaliation fishery bill has passed
| the Senate of the United States. As a
rule retaliatory legislation is indefensible,
but in this case there really seems to be
no other effective method short of war; of
bringing the British authorities to terms.
1t is a clearly defined and unmistakable
notice to Great Britain that American
fishing interests upon the great banks and
outside of jurisdictional shore limits, shall
be protected and not handicapped by an
arrogant people. There is no danger of
war growing out of the action of Congress
should the bill become law. England
is not prepared to hazard a conflict with
the United States upon the issue involved.
She will rather be disposed to enter into
new negotiations for amicable adjustment.
She has violated treaty rights of Ameri-
can fishermen, and some of her best inter
national lawyers have already so advised
her Government. But England never yet
hesitated to browbeat, if permitted, in all
this fishery business, nor has she ever yet
failed to yield up that policy when boldly
confronted, and that is what the United
States Government now proposes to do.
Lastsummer we went over the whole ground
in this fishery dispute, and we assume that
the people are intelligent concerning it,
OF this we may be assured, the plain and
obvious intent of the treaties sustain the
American view. and it is therefore in
keeping with good policy to notify Great
Britain of our intention to stand by our
Interpretation.